The most spineless PM in living memory?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lisvaneblue

I’m not smug, and for the record if we had an election tomorrow Keir Starmer would get my vote

---

Your post this morning was extremely smug, but given the attitude of the Tory cabinet and their minions in recent days it's not surprising that the attitude of the voters who elected them is following a similar course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

Being PM though he had the opportunity to step back away from the shitstorm.

---

Blair adopted US foreign policy, Thatcher didn't, by the way, the UK Government had tried to get rid of Las Malvinas on a couple of occasions before the Argentine Invasion. What we are seeing now in the Middle East is a direct result of UK and American Foreign policy. We completely de stabilised an already unstable region by invading, occupying and attempting to put in place our own and more convenient type of democracy and allowed factions who hated each over to rise up and subsequently created a civil war where people are still being murdered to this day. Sadly, it's not news anymore, people are bored of it. The Tories also supported the invasion and the Lib Dems supported 'Our Troops' once the invasion had started.

These criminal actions by Blair and Bush have completely destabilised the whole world, born out of the invasion was ISIS and their merry followers and a rise in islamophobia and the fascist right. The UK's involvement led to huge amounts of refugees, death and suffering, nobody was spared which probably couldn't be said about that Evil bastard Saddam Hussein who we loved dealing with during the mid to late eighties. It has affected politics in the UK as well, a rise in the neo right, racism and xenophobia, leading to post colonial fallout in the most deprived areas that labour should have helped and supported, which always results in reactionary behaviour like voting to leave the EU because of foreigners and electing Boris-Same in the states with Trump.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lisvaneblue

I’m not smug, and for the record if we had an election tomorrow Keir Starmer would get my vote

---

Have some conviction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Your post this morning was extremely smug, but given the attitude of the Tory cabinet and their minions in recent days it's not surprising that the attitude of the voters who elected them is following a similar course.

---

But.....I would not vote for Drakeford. I think his group over the years has let their voters down big time

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lisvaneblue

But.....I would not vote for Drakeford. I think his group over the years has let their voters down big time

---

I tend to agree with this. However, there's absolutely nothing from recent Westminster governments that make me think they'd be better for Wales than what we have. In fact, I'm almost certain that if the Senedd became Tory ruled, Wales would take an even bigger step backwards. I reckon they'd do their best to get rid of the ability we have in Wales for people in Wales to make decisions in Wales about and for everyone in Wales, rather than being told what to do by London all of the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

I went out and bought some meat and two veg today and stuffed it down my trousers

---

Hope you went on a bus as thats for essential travellers and those needing to get to work safely

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lisvaneblue

But.....I would not vote for Drakeford. I think his group over the years has let their voters down big time

---

Think a lot of folk agree , a lot of them are traditional Labour voters, will be intresting to see how the May election results , Labour lost 6 seats ,probably down to Corbyn dislike and Brexit , with those issues removed it will be of interest to everyone within Wales and beyond as a barometer of the political climate post Covid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

I tend to agree with this. However, there's absolutely nothing from recent Westminster governments that make me think they'd be better for Wales than what we have. In fact, I'm almost certain that if the Senedd became Tory ruled, Wales would take an even bigger step backwards. I reckon they'd do their best to get rid of the ability we have in Wales for people in Wales to make decisions in Wales about and for everyone in Wales, rather than being told what to do by London all of the time.

---

Hypothetical really as the Tories have never had a chance in Wales. Allweknow for sure is that the current incumbents have done for the country they represent

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heisenberg

You haven't addressed the 'twat' part :hehe:

---

I’ve been called worse by the missus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Your post this morning was extremely smug, but given the attitude of the Tory cabinet and their minions in recent days it's not surprising that the attitude of the voters who elected them is following a similar course.

---

Lets not forget that many people who voted Boris in, including life long labour supporters, did so for one thing....Deliver Brexit, and they knew it was unlikely to happen with Corbyn in power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuerto

Blair adopted US foreign policy, Thatcher didn't, by the way, the UK Government had tried to get rid of Las Malvinas on a couple of occasions before the Argentine Invasion. What we are seeing now in the Middle East is a direct result of UK and American Foreign policy. We completely de stabilised an already unstable region by invading, occupying and attempting to put in place our own and more convenient type of democracy and allowed factions who hated each over to rise up and subsequently created a civil war where people are still being murdered to this day. Sadly, it's not news anymore, people are bored of it. The Tories also supported the invasion and the Lib Dems supported 'Our Troops' once the invasion had started.

These criminal actions by Blair and Bush have completely destabilised the whole world, born out of the invasion was ISIS and their merry followers and a rise in islamophobia and the fascist right. The UK's involvement led to huge amounts of refugees, death and suffering, nobody was spared which probably couldn't be said about that Evil bastard Saddam Hussein who we loved dealing with during the mid to late eighties. It has affected politics in the UK as well, a rise in the neo right, racism and xenophobia, leading to post colonial fallout in the most deprived areas that labour should have helped and supported, which always results in reactionary behaviour like voting to leave the EU because of foreigners and electing Boris-Same in the states with Trump.

---

I will never forget the image of bush and blair in cowboys boots and jackets strutting around the White House lawns , supposedly deep in thought

Pair of fire starters

Praying to god

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Hope you went on a bus as thats for essential travellers and those needing to get to work safely

---

I walked

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

I'm by and large anti-war, anti-violence, sort things out by peaceful and diplomatic means.

Thatcher got huge support for the Falklands. It's reckoned that it saved her premiership. She also was PM when we went to war in Iraq the first time. I can't remember her being vilified at the time.

Blair did the same as Thatcher and got vilified. I remember the time that Saddam Hussein's statue was toppled. That symbolism was well received in the UK and, from memory, was well celebrated.

It strikes me that it's a bit odd that Thatcher never really suffered the public outrage years later for her wars, yet Blair did. Perhaps I'm missing something. BTW I'm not saying that I agree with Blair's actions but it's arguable that the whole middle eastern spiral started long before he came along.

---

I get your point about the difference between the reaction to Thatchers wars and Blairs wars.
There was one basic difference. In both thatchers wars she was defending a country that had been unlawfully invaded, The Falklands and Kuwait.
in Blair's case he was helping to invade a sovereign country.
Big difference in the eyes of ordinary people, morally. you only need to look at the help we had in the Falklands and the number of nations involved in Kuwait to see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lisvaneblue

Lets not forget that many people who voted Boris in, including life long labour supporters, did so for one thing....Deliver Brexit, and they knew it was unlikely to happen with Corbyn in power

---

I think the decision to deliver brexit as it were is going to take fecking years and once it's down we can have another referendum because after a few years the public will realise what a monumentally stupid decision leaving europe was . Then when the decision is made to go cap in hand back to europe we will be right in the deep stuff .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lisvaneblue

Hypothetical really as the Tories have never had a chance in Wales. Allweknow for sure is that the current incumbents have done for the country they represent

---

It's hardly hypothetical. Are you saying their performance in Westminster would in no way represent what they would do in Wales? Really? That's akin to saying that the Greens have never had a chance so we don't know what they would do. I'd have a pretty shrewd guess, wouldn't you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I get your point about the difference between the reaction to Thatchers wars and Blairs wars.
There was one basic difference. In both thatchers wars she was defending a country that had been unlawfully invaded, The Falklands and Kuwait.
in Blair's case he was helping to invade a sovereign country.
Big difference in the eyes of ordinary people, morally. you only need to look at the help we had in the Falklands and the number of nations involved in Kuwait to see it.

---

I agree with all that. It still doesn't answer the fact that when Saddam Hussein was finally overthrown, it was celebrated in the UK. I reckon that, at the time it was happening, the second Gulf war was largely supported by the public. Not by me, I might add.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Why does the Cummings story matter? And what does it obscure? The real story is the huge transfer of government assets to private companies that he is overseeing under cover of a pandemic while restructuring the Cabinet Office into his &amp; <a href="https://twitter.com/michaelgove?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@michaelgove</a>&#39;s private fiefdom<br>1/</p>&mdash; Carole Cadwalladr (@carolecadwalla) <a href="https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1264141088010493954?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 23, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Interesting twitter thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Why does the Cummings story matter? And what does it obscure? The real story is the huge transfer of government assets to private companies that he is overseeing under cover of a pandemic while restructuring the Cabinet Office into his & <a href="https://twitter.com/michaelgove?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@michaelgove</a>'s private fiefdom<br>1/</p>— Carole Cadwalladr (@carolecadwalla) <a href="https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1264141088010493954?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 23, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Interesting twitter thread.

---

Is this another conspiracy theory? "huge transfer of government assets to private companies" Shirley someone might spot that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Is this another conspiracy theory? "huge transfer of government assets to private companies" Shirley someone might spot that?

---

Carole Cadwalladr was also accused of being a conspiracy theorist on the Cambridge Analytica story, so she is probably used to being dismissed as such.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Why does the Cummings story matter? And what does it obscure? The real story is the huge transfer of government assets to private companies that he is overseeing under cover of a pandemic while restructuring the Cabinet Office into his &amp; <a href="https://twitter.com/michaelgove?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@michaelgove</a>&#39;s private fiefdom<br>1/</p>&mdash; Carole Cadwalladr (@carolecadwalla) <a href="https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1264141088010493954?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 23, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Interesting twitter thread.

---

Save the NHS....whilst privatising education by the back door. Tax breaks for private health insurance for some and an increase in stealth taxes for everyone. Not straight away. Wont look good for the Midlanders and those up north that voted blue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

Carole Cadwalladr was also accused of being a conspiracy theorist on the Cambridge Analytica story, so she is probably used to being dismissed as such.

---

Even so, huge transfer of government assets is a bit heavy don't you think? What assets would they be FFS?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Even so, huge transfer of government assets is a bit heavy don't you think? What assets would they be FFS?

---

Not really. An asset could be anything from a contract to supply a service to an actual body like the NHS. You're probably thinking towards the "too heavy" part of the spectrum, whereas I think it's likely to be the smaller end of the spectrum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

It's hardly hypothetical. Are you saying their performance in Westminster would in no way represent what they would do in Wales? Really? That's akin to saying that the Greens have never had a chance so we don't know what they would do. I'd have a pretty shrewd guess, wouldn't you?

---

Truth is we don't know. To turn your argument around, are you suggesting that the performance of the Senedd would in no way represent what Labour would do in Westminster if in power?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanD

Save the NHS....whilst privatising education by the back door. Tax breaks for private health insurance for some and an increase in stealth taxes for everyone. Not straight away. Wont look good for the Midlanders and those up north that voted blue.

---

would you like to insert the word "could" into your post? Just for clarity?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Is this another conspiracy theory? "huge transfer of government assets to private companies" Shirley someone might spot that?

---

Read the thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

Read the thread.

---

I did thanks.. sorry if my comment doesn't fit with your thinking. :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I did thanks.. sorry if my comment doesn't fit with your thinking. :hehe:

---

The twitter thread, it says exactly what the assets are. You were asking weren’t you?

Quote:

---

We have no insight into these contracts which did not go to tender but to Cummings's friends & associates. Including a massive transfer of our most private, intimate NHS data. The privatisation of essential state functions is happening in real time in almost complete darkness
2/

---

And it has been noticed, it just suits a lot of people for it to not be in the news

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/04/22/palantir-coronavirus-contract-did-not-go-to-competitive-tender/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/04/vote-leave-ai-firm-wins-seven-government-contracts-in-18-months

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

The twitter thread, it says exactly what the assets are.

---

I don't rad twitter. it is a platform used by journalists and people woith an exe to grind, and those that follow them. Even people in the press say the press take to much notice of iut whewreas the average person has got more sense. I'll go with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I don't rad twitter. it is a platform used by journalists and people woith an exe to grind, and those that follow them. Even people in the press say the press take to much notice of iut whewreas the average person has got more sense. I'll go with that.

---

See above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I don't rad twitter. it is a platform used by journalists and people woith an exe to grind, and those that follow them. Even people in the press say the press take to much notice of iut whewreas the average person has got more sense. I'll go with that.

---

I'm having doubts that you read anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

I'm having doubts that you read anything.

---

I couldn't give a feck what you doubt :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I couldn't give a feck what you doubt :hehe:

---

You don’t seem to care about much other than defending your own preconceived biases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I couldn't give a feck what you doubt :hehe:

---

Good, it would be odd if you did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

You don’t seem to care about much other than defending your own preconceived biases.

---

I don't give a feck what you think either, but you already know that. :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I don't give a feck what you think either, but you already know that. :hehe:

---

You need to keep reminding us that you don't give a feck. Probably after a rant that has come from nowhere precisely because you don't give a feck.

I give a feck about people ignoring what is actually written because it doesn't suit the answer they want to give, including some people actually changing the original post to suit their answer.
But not just my posts but all posts. If you look back through my posts you will find that I have always challenged things such as people posting opinion as fact and then quoting it is fact, but I don't need to mention that do I? You already know form your posts under one of your other persona.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I give a feck about people ignoring what is actually written because it doesn't suit the answer they want to give, including some people actually changing the original post to suit their answer.
But not just my posts but all posts. If you look back through my posts you will find that I have always challenged things such as people posting opinion as fact and then quoting it is fact, but I don't need to mention that do I? You already know form your posts under one of your other persona.

---

Calm down dear. You spent a lot of yesterday arguing about an article on Cummings which was proven to be factual during the course of your doubling down.

You have ended this latest tirade of geriatric hysteria with a claim that I know something about you based on my other persona. What persona is this? You always tend to bring this up when you want to turn the argument into something else. Since you have such a respect of facts, you won't mind me challenging you on this very point. You also won't mind if I ask you to provide proof to back it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I give a feck about people ignoring what is actually written because it doesn't suit the answer they want

---

Try practicing what your preach maybe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO

Calm down dear. You spent a lot of yesterday arguing about an article on Cummings which was proven to be factual during the course of your doubling down.

You have ended this latest tirade of geriatric hysteria with a claim that I know something about you based on my other persona. What persona is this? You always tend to bring this up when you want to turn the argument into something else. Since you have such a respect of facts, you won't mind me challenging you on this very point. You also won't mind if I ask you to provide proof to back it up.

---

You see you have done it again. Everyone else was arguing about an article that turned out to be factual. In reality it was not the article I had referred to in my original post and the article they were talking about I had not and still have not read. Difficult to understand that is it? A perfect example of people ignoring the actual post because it doesn't suit the answer they want to give.
The things I missed in the article I did read (in para 10 apparently) I conceded when they were pointed out to me (Thank you Heisenburg)
What persona? do you want a list? :hehe::hehe::hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Given the circumstances, I was going to say it's incredible that Boris Johnson didn't have the courage to face the press today and instead pushed Grant Schapps into the firing line, but let's be honest - it wasn't incredible at all. Considering his track record, it was exactly what you would have expected Johnson to do. Can anyone think of another Prime Minister in our recent history who would have been gutless enough to have done something similar?

Regardless of which side of the political spectrum you're on, I think you have to concede that Johnson is comfortably the most spineless leader this country has had during our lifetimes.

---

Obviously he heard you Dave.

He is taking it today.

You should have sent a question in!